This rings true of what I've been saying all along, it appears even AT&T
is now scared of Apple and its business intentions...
Keep in mind, the iPhone is only one small update away from making EVERY
iPhone compatible with VoIP, then simply dropping the old cell network
like a hot potato.
AT&T needs to be very careful here, Apple is a much stronger company, so
they need to play nice or end up like IBM.
---
Important Parts Here:
What I believe is troubling the relationship between AT&T and Apple is
the upcoming auction for 700-MHz wireless spectrum and AT&T's discovery
that -- as I have predicted for weeks -- Apple will be joining Google in
bidding. AT&T thought its five-year "exclusive" iPhone agreement with
Apple would have precluded such a bid, but that just shows how poorly
Randall Stephenson understood Steve Jobs. Steve always hurts his friends
to see how much they really love him, so AT&T probably should have
expected this kind of corporate body blow.
To his credit, Stephenson took the dispute to the streets this way,
showing he isn't intimidated by Jobs. It was a bold and rare response
for big business and was definitely unexpected by Cupertino, which won't
underestimate AT&T again.
I'm not privy to any inside details here, but there are two ways I can
see Jobs rationalizing his auction position and they aren't necessarily
exclusive. He could claim to intend the 700-MHz auction participation as
a pure investment, just a good use for the $30+ billion Apple has
squirreled away.
Nah.
Or Jobs could tell AT&T that Apple is investing solely in a DATA network
for which it has no voice ambitions. Maybe all MacBooks will soon get
700-MHz access cards.
This excuse rings truer, but of course it would still be a scam on
Steve's part.
It would not surprise me at all if this were the case and when the
700-MHz network is finally up and running Jobs claims astonishment that
the most popular data application is Voice over IP, a direct competitor
to AT&T Wireless. This may be part of the reason why Apple has been so
slow approving third-party iPhone applications. Wouldn't your first
application be a VoIP client?
In article
<linuxlovesosx-432F91.12591301122007@mpls-nnrp-03.inet.qwest.net>,
Oxford <linuxlovesosx@superart.com> wrote:
> This rings true of what I've been saying all along, it appears even AT&T
> is now scared of Apple and its business intentions...
>
> Keep in mind, the iPhone is only one small update away from making EVERY
> iPhone compatible with VoIP, then simply dropping the old cell network
> like a hot potato.
Um... and using what network instead? The iPhone couldn't use some
hypothetical 700 MHz network without a hardware upgrade, unless Apple
has been doing something very sneaky (and implausible).
It would be interesting to see Apple get this spectrum, but I wouldn't
consider it too likely. It would be just as interesting to see Google
get this spectrum, and that might even have a lot of the same benefits
for Apple. That's more likely, but far from a forgone conclusion.
[snip]
--
"That's George Washington, the first president, of course. The interesting thing
about him is that I read three--three or four books about him last year. Isn't
that interesting?"
- George W. Bush to reporter Kai Diekmann, May 5, 2006
> > This rings true of what I've been saying all along, it appears even AT&T
> > is now scared of Apple and its business intentions...
> >
> > Keep in mind, the iPhone is only one small update away from making EVERY
> > iPhone compatible with VoIP, then simply dropping the old cell network
> > like a hot potato.
>
> Um... and using what network instead? The iPhone couldn't use some
> hypothetical 700 MHz network without a hardware upgrade, unless Apple
> has been doing something very sneaky (and implausible).
802.11 of course, that offers plenty of speed and coupling it with free
phone calls to any other iPhone would be about the 6th Killer App in the
history of the industry, 4th one directly relating to Apple/SJ hardware.
(visicalc, pagemaker, www, then iChatIP)
> It would be interesting to see Apple get this spectrum, but I wouldn't
> consider it too likely. It would be just as interesting to see Google
> get this spectrum, and that might even have a lot of the same benefits
> for Apple. That's more likely, but far from a forgone conclusion.
yes, I kinda doubt Apple will purchase the spectrum outright, but a
tandem Google deal makes sense now that Google has officially said they
aren't going to build a phone.
The whole spectrum is still 400 days away from being usable, so on the
"way out there" side of things, Apple could offer a $49 iChatIP box that
connects up to literally billions of old Analog TV's and makes them all
two way video walkie talkies. (smirk)
apple has a very long history with phones and phone phreaking, so it
will be interesting IF they bid, or tandem bid with Google.
> This rings true of what I've been saying all along, it appears even AT&T
> is now scared of Apple and its business intentions...
Hardly, moron.
>
> Keep in mind, the iPhone is only one small update away from making EVERY
> iPhone compatible with VoIP, then simply dropping the old cell network
> like a hot potato.
Which will make it nothing more than an overpriced iPod.
>
> AT&T needs to be very careful here, Apple is a much stronger company, so
> they need to play nice or end up like IBM.
You mean they'll kick the crap out of Apple products?
>
> ---
>
> Important Parts Here:
>
> What I believe is troubling the relationship between AT&T and Apple is
> the upcoming auction for 700-MHz wireless spectrum and AT&T's discovery
> that -- as I have predicted for weeks -- Apple will be joining Google in
> bidding.
Actually, they won't. You're making this up. Google has stated that they
will be bidding without any partnerships.
> AT&T thought its five-year "exclusive" iPhone agreement with
> Apple would have precluded such a bid, but that just shows how poorly
> Randall Stephenson understood Steve Jobs.
No- AT&T figured out what a piece of crap they were sold.
In article
<linuxlovesosx-7C18BB.13404001122007@mpls-nnrp-04.inet.qwest.net>,
Oxford <linuxlovesosx@superart.com> wrote:
> ZnU <znu@fake.invalid> wrote:
>
> > > This rings true of what I've been saying all along, it appears even AT&T
> > > is now scared of Apple and its business intentions...
> > >
> > > Keep in mind, the iPhone is only one small update away from making EVERY
> > > iPhone compatible with VoIP, then simply dropping the old cell network
> > > like a hot potato.
> >
> > Um... and using what network instead? The iPhone couldn't use some
> > hypothetical 700 MHz network without a hardware upgrade, unless Apple
> > has been doing something very sneaky (and implausible).
>
> 802.11 of course, that offers plenty of speed and coupling it with free
> phone calls to any other iPhone would be about the 6th Killer App in the
> history of the industry, 4th one directly relating to Apple/SJ hardware.
> (visicalc, pagemaker, www, then iChatIP)
It would be nice to have VoIP for when there's WiFi around, but the idea
of using WiFi in place of the cellular network is, at present, nuts.
Even in areas with nearly blanket WiFi coverage, there's no mechanism to
do transparent handoffs between access points using commodity hardware.
I'd rather not have to stand in one place for the duration of a call.
[snip]
--
"That's George Washington, the first president, of course. The interesting thing
about him is that I read three--three or four books about him last year. Isn't
that interesting?"
- George W. Bush to reporter Kai Diekmann, May 5, 2006
In article
<linuxlovesosx-7C18BB.13404001122007@mpls-nnrp-04.inet.qwest.net>,
Oxford <linuxlovesosx@superart.com> wrote:
> yes, I kinda doubt Apple will purchase the spectrum outright, but a
> tandem Google deal makes sense now that Google has officially said they
> aren't going to build a phone.
>
And that they are providing the software to let other people do
so--software that doesn't have anything to do with iPhone.
In article
<linuxlovesosx-7C18BB.13404001122007@mpls-nnrp-04.inet.qwest.net>,
Oxford <linuxlovesosx@superart.com> wrote:
> apple has a very long history with phones and phone phreaking,
Well, let's see. I'm pretty sure Steve Jobs did drugs when he was
younger, so you can just as easily say that Apple has a very long
history of drug abuse with its top officers.
I'm also sure that Jobs takes a shit every day, so you can also say that
Apple has a long history of being involved with waste management.
Oxturd keeps talking about the days when a couple of college
students/droputs sold some phone phreaking boxes to make extra money,
and somehow in his mind that makes Apple an expert in telecommunications.
Of course, Oxturd also thinks that Adele Goldberg served "milk and
cookies" when Apple visited PARC, so...
Oxford <linuxlovesosx@superart.com> wrote in
news:linuxlovesosx-7C18BB.13404001122007@mpls-nnrp-04.inet.qwest.net:
> ZnU <znu@fake.invalid> wrote:
>
>> > This rings true of what I've been saying all along, it appears even
>> > AT&T is now scared of Apple and its business intentions...
>> >
>> > Keep in mind, the iPhone is only one small update away from making
>> > EVERY iPhone compatible with VoIP, then simply dropping the old
>> > cell network like a hot potato.
>>
>> Um... and using what network instead? The iPhone couldn't use some
>> hypothetical 700 MHz network without a hardware upgrade, unless Apple
>> has been doing something very sneaky (and implausible).
>
> 802.11 of course,
802.11x is not a network, dimwit.
> that offers plenty of speed
And yet connection speed can be a quarter of 3G speeds.
> and coupling it with
> free phone calls to any other iPhone would be about the 6th Killer App
> in the history of the industry, 4th one directly relating to Apple/SJ
> hardware. (visicalc, pagemaker, www, then iChatIP)
Sorry- I get free phone calls to other cells now. Apple did not invent
that.
>
>> It would be interesting to see Apple get this spectrum, but I
>> wouldn't consider it too likely. It would be just as interesting to
>> see Google get this spectrum, and that might even have a lot of the
>> same benefits for Apple. That's more likely, but far from a forgone
>> conclusion.
>
> yes, I kinda doubt Apple will purchase the spectrum outright, but a
> tandem Google deal makes sense now that Google has officially said
> they aren't going to build a phone.
Not going to happen, clueless twit.
>
> The whole spectrum is still 400 days away from being usable, so on the
> "way out there" side of things, Apple could offer a $49 iChatIP box
> that connects up to literally billions of old Analog TV's and makes
> them all two way video walkie talkies. (smirk)
Damn- you are a complete idiot. Why would you propose such an open
violation of the spectrum guidelines?
>
> apple has a very long history with phones and phone phreaking,
short history, actually.
> so it
> will be interesting IF they bid, or tandem bid with Google.
>
"Oxford" <linuxlovesosx@superart.com> wrote in message
news:linuxlovesosx-432F91.12591301122007@mpls-nnrp-03.inet.qwest.net...
> This rings true of what I've been saying all along, it appears even AT&T
> is now scared of Apple and its business intentions...
>
> AT&T needs to be very careful here, Apple is a much stronger company, so
> they need to play nice or end up like IBM.
>
> Apple will be joining Google in
> bidding.
First - Oxy is quoting a BLOG - another fanboy's OPINION
Far from fact...
This Oxy insane fantasy that "Apple is a much stronger company" is VERY
telling
of just how delusional our nut boy is - anyone that would state this
obviously isn't
in touch with reality. Or doesn't have enough brains to look at the
financials.
Then - as I posted yesterday - Google is NOT going to have partners in the
bidding.
"Google will file an application to participate in the 700MHz auction on
Monday, the
company said in a news release. Google's application will not include any
partners."
And, unlike Oxy, **I** post information from reliable sources - not some
fanboy blog...
Care to verify the story?? Below may help...
In news:YbadnZcsD5S1YszanZ2dnUVZ_vmlnZ2d@giganews.com ,
Ness-Net <richard.no@more.damn.spam.nessnet.com>spewed forth:
> "Oxford" <linuxlovesosx@superart.com> wrote in message
> news:linuxlovesosx-432F91.12591301122007@mpls-nnrp-03.inet.qwest.net...
>
>
>> This rings true of what I've been saying all along, it appears even
>> AT&T is now scared of Apple and its business intentions...
>>
>
>> AT&T needs to be very careful here, Apple is a much stronger
>> company, so they need to play nice or end up like IBM.
>>
>> Apple will be joining Google in
>> bidding.
>
> First - Oxy is quoting a BLOG - another fanboy's OPINION
> Far from fact...
>
> This Oxy insane fantasy that "Apple is a much stronger company" is
> VERY telling
> of just how delusional our nut boy is - anyone that would state this
> obviously isn't
> in touch with reality. Or doesn't have enough brains to look at the
> financials.
>
> Then - as I posted yesterday - Google is NOT going to have partners
> in the bidding.
>
> http://www.pcworld.com/businesscente..._spectrum.html
>
> "Google will file an application to participate in the 700MHz auction
> on Monday, the
> company said in a news release. Google's application will not include
> any partners."
>
> And, unlike Oxy, **I** post information from reliable sources - not
> some fanboy blog...
> Care to verify the story?? Below may help...
>
> http://www.google.com/search?q=Googl...e7&rlz=1I7DKUS
If he's a moron, why do you keep repling to him?
If people like yourself would stop feeding him, he'd go away.
Better yet, KF him and you'll never see his stupidity again
"Ness-Net" <richard.no@more.damn.spam.nessnet.com> wrote in
news:YbadnZcsD5S1YszanZ2dnUVZ_vmlnZ2d@giganews.com :
> First - Oxy is quoting a BLOG - another fanboy's OPINION
> Far from fact...
>
>
MEDS, NESSY, MEDS!!.....(C;
Larry
--
Isn't it ironic that the same ISPs that are telling you
you're downloads threaten their networks......
.....are testing 100Gbps TV to sell on the SAME systems? http://tinyurl.com/27qx3v
> The spectrum is 400 days (?) from being AWARDED.
>
> Next comes type certification of equipment.
>
> Then the manufacturing of equipment (mainly chipsets).
>
> Then the network build out.
>
> Or are you dreaming that in 400 days everything will magically start
> working?
it apple wins, they'll have product on day one. that's just how they
roll.
> DTC <me@nothingtoseehere.zzx> wrote:
>
>> The spectrum is 400 days (?) from being AWARDED.
>>
>> Next comes type certification of equipment.
>>
>> Then the manufacturing of equipment (mainly chipsets).
>>
>> Then the network build out.
>>
>> Or are you dreaming that in 400 days everything will magically start
>> working?
>
> it apple wins, they'll have product on day one. that's just how they
> roll.
>
That would mean that they are building the network now. Funny- I don't see
any expenses for that in their financial reports. So tell me- how are they
building the netwrok today to be ready for day one?
yes, poor nessy is losing touch with what is happening to the cell
market because of apple's massively successful launch of their iphone.
yep, he may need meds to get him through the next few decades... or
perhaps an iphone so he can begin to learn why the cell industry is
being shook to its knees by apple.
Do even a slight bit of homework before you make your
completely stupid statements.
It amazes me that you can be so clueless....
"Oxford" <linuxlovesosx@superart.com> wrote in message
news:linuxlovesosx-DA81AC.22385901122007@mpls-nnrp-04.inet.qwest.net...
> DTC <me@nothingtoseehere.zzx> wrote:
>
>> The spectrum is 400 days (?) from being AWARDED.
>>
>> Next comes type certification of equipment.
>>
>> Then the manufacturing of equipment (mainly chipsets).
>>
>> Then the network build out.
>>
>> Or are you dreaming that in 400 days everything will magically start
>> working?
>
> it apple wins, they'll have product on day one. that's just how they
> roll.
Larry, bud - just 'cause you and I haven't seen eye to eye in the past....
No reason why a fanatic fanboy like Oxy should get by with posting
this totally obvious fanatical fanboy fiction.
This evening, my "meds" are doing just fine, thanks.
But, it doesn't change the subject at hand.
Oxy posts complete fanboy fiction.
"Larry" <noone@home.com> wrote in message
news:Xns99F9E9DB378C1noonehomecom@208.49.80.253...
> "Ness-Net" <richard.no@more.damn.spam.nessnet.com> wrote in
> news:YbadnZcsD5S1YszanZ2dnUVZ_vmlnZ2d@giganews.com :
>
>> First - Oxy is quoting a BLOG - another fanboy's OPINION
>> Far from fact...
>>
>>
>
> MEDS, NESSY, MEDS!!.....(C;
>
>
> Larry
> --
> Isn't it ironic that the same ISPs that are telling you
> you're downloads threaten their networks......
> ....are testing 100Gbps TV to sell on the SAME systems?
> http://tinyurl.com/27qx3v
>
The complete CRAP you post isn't even close to reality.
"Oxford" <linuxlovesosx@superart.com> wrote in message
news:linuxlovesosx-A21698.22464501122007@mpls-nnrp-04.inet.qwest.net...
> Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:
>
>> MEDS, NESSY, MEDS!!.....(C;
>
> yes, poor nessy is losing touch with what is happening to the cell
> market because of apple's massively successful launch of their iphone.
>
> yep, he may need meds to get him through the next few decades... or
> perhaps an iphone so he can begin to learn why the cell industry is
> being shook to its knees by apple.
In article
<linuxlovesosx-DA81AC.22385901122007@mpls-nnrp-04.inet.qwest.net>,
Oxford <linuxlovesosx@superart.com> wrote:
> DTC <me@nothingtoseehere.zzx> wrote:
>
> > The spectrum is 400 days (?) from being AWARDED.
> >
> > Next comes type certification of equipment.
> >
> > Then the manufacturing of equipment (mainly chipsets).
> >
> > Then the network build out.
> >
> > Or are you dreaming that in 400 days everything will magically start
> > working?
>
> it apple wins, they'll have product on day one. that's just how they
> roll.
So, that's your prediction? For everyone to see?
What waffling will you use when that doesn't happen? What excuse will
you have about how you "really didn't mean THAT" when that doesn't
happen?
"Oxford" <linuxlovesosx@superart.com> wrote in message
news:linuxlovesosx-432F91.12591301122007@mpls-nnrp-03.inet.qwest.net...
> This rings true of what I've been saying all along, it appears even AT&T
> is now scared of Apple and its business intentions...
>
> Keep in mind, the iPhone is only one small update away from making EVERY
> iPhone compatible with VoIP, then simply dropping the old cell network
> like a hot potato.
>
> AT&T needs to be very careful here, Apple is a much stronger company, so
> they need to play nice or end up like IBM.
>
> ---
>
> Important Parts Here:
>
> What I believe is troubling the relationship between AT&T and Apple is
> the upcoming auction for 700-MHz wireless spectrum and AT&T's discovery
> that -- as I have predicted for weeks -- Apple will be joining Google in
> bidding. AT&T thought its five-year "exclusive" iPhone agreement with
> Apple would have precluded such a bid, but that just shows how poorly
> Randall Stephenson understood Steve Jobs. Steve always hurts his friends
> to see how much they really love him, so AT&T probably should have
> expected this kind of corporate body blow.
>
> To his credit, Stephenson took the dispute to the streets this way,
> showing he isn't intimidated by Jobs. It was a bold and rare response
> for big business and was definitely unexpected by Cupertino, which won't
> underestimate AT&T again.
>
> I'm not privy to any inside details here, but there are two ways I can
> see Jobs rationalizing his auction position and they aren't necessarily
> exclusive. He could claim to intend the 700-MHz auction participation as
> a pure investment, just a good use for the $30+ billion Apple has
> squirreled away.
>
> Nah.
>
> Or Jobs could tell AT&T that Apple is investing solely in a DATA network
> for which it has no voice ambitions. Maybe all MacBooks will soon get
> 700-MHz access cards.
>
> This excuse rings truer, but of course it would still be a scam on
> Steve's part.
>
> It would not surprise me at all if this were the case and when the
> 700-MHz network is finally up and running Jobs claims astonishment that
> the most popular data application is Voice over IP, a direct competitor
> to AT&T Wireless. This may be part of the reason why Apple has been so
> slow approving third-party iPhone applications. Wouldn't your first
> application be a VoIP client?
>
> ---
>
> Full Article Here:
>
> http://snipurl.com/1uh83
>
> -
Ness-Net wrote:
> Larry, bud - just 'cause you and I haven't seen eye to eye in the past....
>
> No reason why a fanatic fanboy like Oxy should get by with posting
> this totally obvious fanatical fanboy fiction.
>
> This evening, my "meds" are doing just fine, thanks.
> But, it doesn't change the subject at hand.
>
> Oxy posts complete fanboy fiction.
>
>
Absolutely true but he is delusional and really believes he is "Steves"
girlfriend and has all of the scoop on everything in "Steves" mind and
speaks for "Steve".
Reasoning with him is about as valuable as going down to the psych ward
of your local hospital this afternoon and trying to establish a dialogue
with those unfortunate folks. It would be a total waste of your time.
I am also have an engineering background and understand your frustration
but you really aren't dealing with a sensible or rational person. The
best thing you could possibly do is ignore him.
"Ness-Net" <richard.no@more.damn.spam.nessnet.com> wrote in
news:frudnYSCzqhnzc_anZ2dnUVZ_tajnZ2d@giganews.com :
> No reason why a fanatic fanboy like Oxy should get by with
posting
> this totally obvious fanatical fanboy fiction.
>
>
He isn't "getting by" with anything. I find him rather amusing,
if a little pitiful. You mustn't get so upset. It's bad for
your heart!
He's a funny buffoon, if nothing else. Teenagers are like that,
unless the school bureaucrats make drug addicts out of them when
they're in elementary school, at least in America.
Oxy is just proof positive of how well sheer advertising and hype
can hypnotize common people out of good sense.
He was gone for a while, almost a day. I missed him...(c;
Larry
--
Isn't it ironic that the same ISPs that are telling you
you're downloads threaten their networks......
.....are testing 100Gbps TV to sell on the SAME systems? http://tinyurl.com/27qx3v
> > apple has a very long history with phones and phone phreaking, so it
> > will be interesting IF they bid, or tandem bid with Google.
>
> Um, no. Jobs and Woz had a short period of time where they made money being
> thieves building blue boxes to steal long distance service.
>
> You've got your head so far up your ass you can practically see daylight
> again.
but apple continued to develop telephony ideas throughout its history.
knowledge navigator was a wireless phone concept, the shipping product
GeoPort was a telephony device. Apple developed several software only
phones, all long before the iPhone became so successful.
the difference is, i know Apple's history better than anyone posting
here, so this knowledge confuses many people, mainly the so called "cell
experts" which simply don't understand apple's deep, lifelong interest
in wireless communications.
Oxford <linuxlovesosx@superart.com> wrote in
news:linuxlovesosx-1429AD.10140102122007@mpls-nnrp-04.inet.qwest.net:
> "Bill Kearney" <wkearney-99@hot-mail-com> wrote:
>
>> > apple has a very long history with phones and phone phreaking, so
>> > it will be interesting IF they bid, or tandem bid with Google.
>>
>> Um, no. Jobs and Woz had a short period of time where they made
>> money being thieves building blue boxes to steal long distance
>> service.
>>
>> You've got your head so far up your ass you can practically see
>> daylight again.
>
> but apple continued to develop telephony ideas throughout its history.
> knowledge navigator was a wireless phone concept, the shipping product
> GeoPort was a telephony device. Apple developed several software only
> phones, all long before the iPhone became so successful.
So they have no experience with hardware phones, only second rate software
solutions. Ehanks for clarifying.
>
> the difference is, i know Apple's history better than anyone posting
> here,
Not true.
> so this knowledge confuses many people,
No- your stupidity confuses many people.
> mainly the so called
> "cell experts" which simply don't understand apple's deep, lifelong
> interest in wireless communications.
We don't understand it because it doesn't exist.
>
> they simply have no idea... i do...
>
You barely understand how to power your computer on.
On 2007-12-02 11:14:01 -0600, Oxford <linuxlovesosx@superart.com> said:
>
> the difference is, i know Apple's history better than anyone posting
> here, so this knowledge confuses many people, mainly the so called "cell
> experts" which simply don't understand apple's deep, lifelong interest
> in wireless communications.
>
> they simply have no idea... i do...
As I stated before...GO SHOOT YOURSELF IN THE HEAD! You are way to
stupid to live another minute. You are wasting oxygen that others can
use.
>
> >> You've got your head so far up your ass you can practically see
> >> daylight again.
> >
> > but apple continued to develop telephony ideas throughout its history.
> > knowledge navigator was a wireless phone concept, the shipping product
> > GeoPort was a telephony device. Apple developed several software only
> > phones, all long before the iPhone became so successful.
>
> So they have no experience with hardware phones, only second rate software
> solutions. Ehanks for clarifying.
apple as always built the best... so I guess the question is... why do
you hate quality so much?
> > the difference is, i know Apple's history better than anyone posting
> > here,
>
> Not true.
name someone better... bet you can't.
> > so this knowledge confuses many people,
>
> No- your stupidity confuses many people.
i only post facts, if you disagree, you are wrong. it's that simple.
> > mainly the so called
> > "cell experts" which simply don't understand apple's deep, lifelong
> > interest in wireless communications.
>
> We don't understand it because it doesn't exist.
oh, but watch a little video... which clearly proves my point. done
around 1989, long before most cell companies were around...
> > they simply have no idea... i do...
> >
>
> You barely understand how to power your computer on.
yes, and that is because on a Mac you only turn it on ONCE, then let the
sophisticated hardware and software allow it to sleep / wake for the
rest of its life...
but you are still using a PC so wouldn't know much about sophisticated
computing equipment such as Apple builds.
Did Apple just trump AT&T? It appears so... 
Linear Mode
